Charity or Duty: What do we owe others?

[Wenty]

Concerns moral obligations.

http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/personal/...obligation.html (http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/personal/thinking/obligation.html)

What are peoples thoughts on this question?

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

I guess we have an obligation as humans to help each other out if we want to co-exist in a society with others.

On Charity...'Give no alms to beggers...', well I am not quite sure. As the author says, I'm not quite sure about this topic and welcome discussion!

[Hate Is Art]

I try to give to homeless people as much as can spare, i'm pretty short money so it's usualy not much, but people have bad luck and deserve a hand in getting back up on their feet.

Like Geist said we (most of us anyway) live in the (comparitivily) rich west and owe to those who are suffering to help out.

[Wenty]

yeah but is it a moral obligation

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Not at all, I dont believe there are any moral obligations to anybody else. Perhaps thats the kind of answer you are looking for.

[Wenty]

Wasn't looking for an answer as such; responses really.

However, as has been pointed out to me, if we accept moral obligations we have to ask where does it derive its obligatory quality? As I was holding in some cases there are moral obligations i could only respond with moral intuitions.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Unless you are a bourgeios, exploiter or some kind of criminal you don't "owe" much to others.

Concepts like "charity" try to fix poverty to keep the ruling class up there with their benefits.

[SittingBull47]

perhaps. That sounds a bit negative on the whole charity concept.
In my opinion, no one is bound or obligated to give donations or help anyone. People that force people to help others, though they mean well (most cases) can't hide the fact that it is not true charity. (we had to do 20 hours of forced community service before we could be confirmed in my church). true charity is just thinking by yourself, with no impetus, to help a person or some people. Altruism. No one is obligated unless they think they are.

[Wenty]

No one is obligated unless they think they are.

Well that was what i was getting at. The only way response i had was my own moral intuitions.


Concepts like "charity" try to fix poverty to keep the ruling class up there with their benefits.

Even if this were true, which i don't think it is, what alternatives are there? People are dieing, charities are set up to help them; there is no alterior motive.

[Hate Is Art]

Moral obligation = not being a complete bastard.

[Trissy]

complete bastard = anyone who doesn't do what I think they should be doing

I don't think I'm morally obliged to do anything, and so giving to beggars is not something I feel I have to. I happily and willingly give to beggars if they appear not to think I SHOULD give to them, but I sometimes give to beggars when they lay a guilt trip on me and I lack the balls to walk away. I think Nietzsche struck the nail of the head when he said:

Beggars ought to be abolished: for one is vexed at giving to them, and vexed at not giving to them

[Wenty]

why are you vexed at giving to them?

[Raisa]

other people have shared with me, when I really needed something and I really apreiciated it, so when someone else needs something and its my lucky day I only do the same. Because I understand what its like to need something and I did not forget how much it meant to me that someone would help me out when I needed it.

[Hate Is Art]

exactly, do you lack the empathy of spirit not to give to a homeless person?

[Individual]

What do we owe others?

I didn't realize I fucking owed anyone anything? I owe my thoughts to what?

I owe my love, I am willing to give love. Women willing to accept love, and I owe them.

You are owed nothing. I am owed nothing. Who fucking owes me? Not two bucks, not a sexual experience. What the hell do I owe you?

Do you want money? Who owes me money? Do you want friendship? I have that, I don't owe it.

My love, as an individual, and you deserve it?

Do you want a dollar? Do you want my fucking shoe?

I'll give you an interpretation, it is yours, do away with it.

[Trissy]

why are you vexed at giving to them?
I'm vexed in two ways. Firstly because I don't think I should need to give to people when the world is able to support all of us...I'm frustrated at the current state of society in that sense. Secondly, I feel annoyed and frustrated at being made to feel like I should give to beggars when I know I don't want to.

'Why don't I want to you to?' might be your next question. Well put simply, when one gives to a beggar you do so because you want them to spend it on food, drink, clothes or any other things they might need to get themselves out of the situation. What I don't want to do is to support any drug or alcohol problem they may have because I will not pay my part in helping drug dealers get rich whilst drug takers destroy their lives. I know that I shouldn't discriminate against all beggars in that way but everybody doesn't have the time to investigate their precise circumstances of each homeless person and hence I try not give too any. If I had the finances then I'd donate to homeless charities if anything.

Anyway, we need to ask ourselves how these people got into this situation in the first place. I think part of that answer is found in how Capitalism works, and so instead of fighting homelessness as an effect, I think we should tackle the cause.

So that's why I find beggars vexing on a personal note. Whatever you decide to do leaves you feeling shitty.

[encore]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 08:27 PM
What do we owe others?

I didn't realize I fucking owed anyone anything? I owe my thoughts to what?

I owe my love, I am willing to give love. Women willing to accept love, and I owe them.

You are owed nothing. I am owed nothing. Who fucking owes me? Not two bucks, not a sexual experience. What the hell do I owe you?

Do you want money? Who owes me money? Do you want friendship? I have that, I don't owe it.

My love, as an individual, and you deserve it?

Do you want a dollar? Do you want my fucking shoe?

I'll give you an interpretation, it is yours, do away with it.
Very poetic. :)

[apathy maybe]

Charity should not be needed. Also many people give to charity and then continue to live shitty lives. They do the're good deed for the day (or the week or month), then they go and fire somebody from the factory. I hate fucking capitalism.

On a similer note, I was having a discussion with a couple of my siblings on charity and politics.
If you are a charity you should be political. Because how can you continue to give money away with out trying to fix the root causes of the problems. (The argument started over the Wilderness Society; they are a charity, but also very political.) What is the point of not being political? Things will continue as they have done.

[che's long lost daughter]

I think people practice charity because they think that they have a moral obligation to do so. So i guess, charity and duty are relative.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 12:40 AM
Even if this were true, which i don't think it is, what alternatives are there?
Changing the present economical order.


People are dieing, charities are set up to help them; there is no alterior motive.

Such things do not fix the situation of those "in need" or what causes them to remain in that situation.

Rather, they keep that people in the same situation without giving a fuck about the causes of that. And of course, it's a nice way for the ruling class to "feel better about themselves".

[Wenty]

Such things do not fix the situation of those "in need" or what causes them to remain in that situation.

Rather, they keep that people in the same situation without giving a fuck about the causes of that. And of course, it's a nice way for the ruling class to "feel better about themselves".

Well rather than believe that and not give to starving and dieing people i'd rather believe it and do some to try and help. I think it does help significantly and the third world would be in an even worse state without the selfless acts of charities such as oxfam and christian aid and so on and on.

(Trissy Posted on Jul 23 2004, 09:16 PM )

Anyway, we need to ask ourselves how these people got into this situation in the first place. I think part of that answer is found in how Capitalism works, and so instead of fighting homelessness as an effect, I think we should tackle the cause

A lot of homeless peoplr become homeless because they lose their jobs, family and have no one else to help them. The cause is therefore mere unemployment. I believe we should still help them anyway but thats going off the topic of moral obligatons...

[Rasta Sapian]

soooooo alll weeeeee areeeeeeee sayyyyyyiiiiiiinnnngggg is give peace a chance
:)

want some, come get some, bad enough, take some......................

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 05:09 PM
Well rather than believe that and not give to starving and dieing people i'd rather believe it and do some to try and help. I think it does help significantly and the third world would be in an even worse state without the selfless acts of charities such as oxfam and christian aid and so on and on.
The point is that you don't "owe" them anything unless you're rich or you have an excessive ammount of things that you dont really need to have a "normal" life.

What I'm trying to do is questioning the point of charity in a capitalist society. I don't think it's something we should care a lot, but I think it's fine if you want to. It's a good thing, actually, to an extent.

But this thing about considering it some kind of "debt" is stupid, especially if you're not rich. There's a lot of wealth where it shouldn't be, and although occasionally some of the "successful entrepeneurs" decide to do charity, they normally don't and keep buying their own yatchs and airplanes... while those proletarians with "decent jobs" end up feelingn they "owe" something.

[Wenty]

well i refer you to someone who does believe in moral obligations, Peter Singer.

http://humanities.uchicago.edu/faculty/mgr...ng/aSinger.html (http://humanities.uchicago.edu/faculty/mgreen/IntroEthicsF00/Notes/Reading/aSinger.html)

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 01:34 PM
well i refer you to someone who does believe in moral obligations, Peter Singer.

http://humanities.uchicago.edu/faculty/mgr...ng/aSinger.html (http://humanities.uchicago.edu/faculty/mgreen/IntroEthicsF00/Notes/Reading/aSinger.html)
Well, the case about a "drowning child" is different than doing "charity" in a capitalist society, which is what I was mostly talking about (that is, the idea that one must concentrate on just "making charity" even if one's not the real responsible for that situation)

I don't think one "must" save somebody if doing so risks one's life.

I'll quote a part of the site:


He argues for this conclusion by proposing an analogy between the victims of famine and a drowning child who can be rescued at little cost: getting muddy pants.

I put that bit on bold since, if my english's not that wrong, it means that in that case, one is not "sacrificing" himself. To me, in that case, one should help the other. Excepting the "muddy pants", you are not losing.

Now if you feel you should always help others, even when sacrificing yourself for them, i think you're wrong.

I repeat it, what I was talking mostly about is about the role of charity in a society where most of the wealth is owned by an elite, and the rest leaves in a unstable situation and still feel they "must" be the ones helping those in need.

I hope I cleared that out.

[Wenty]

Singer is saying that morally there isn't a difference between saving the drowning child and saving someone from famine, geography doesn't make any difference.

[Fidelbrand]

Morality is much about folkways and mores as buttressed by some post-modernists .

I concur with Geist , as in "I guess we have an obligation as humans to help each other out if we want to co-exist in a society with others."

[Revolt!]

Morality is much about folkways and mores as buttressed by some post-modernists .

Excuse me??